I can’t say that I anticipate Edge becoming my daily workhorse, but it seems suited to one process I do a lot. I locate content, annotate and highlight that content, save what I have marked up, reflect on several marked up documents, and then write something. I have a system for doing this from PDFs (mostly journal articles I download), but I have yet to find a perfect system for doing this with web content.
Edge has what I regard as reasonable markup and share tools built in. I can’t really say that build in tools are better than capabilities added as plugins or extensions, but I am just guessing that there is an efficiency advantage. As long as a browser does not integrate too many capabilities, built in would seem to offer advantages. This is the present state of Edge.
The icon to activate the annotation/highlight options appears in the upper-right corner of the browser display.
Selecting the annotation icons opens up a tool display (top left-hand corner). You can highlight, write/draw directly on the browser image, or add a text comment. Your finished work can be saved to OneNote or shared to several to one of several options (I save work to Evernote).
My only complaint at this point is the method of highlighting. I would prefer a highlighter that carefully follows a line of text. The Edge highlighter is used like an actual highlighter meaning my highlights come out messy rather than neat.
What are you willing to share to get something in return? The answer to this question may be very relevant to the future of several companies – Google, Apple, and Microsoft.
Are you willing to share data derived from your online behavior? This seems to be shaping up as a dividing line newly promoted by these companies to differentiate themselves and attract users and their money. (The New Yorker offers their analysis).
Here is how the companies spin their positions. Google wants you to believe that it collects information about you to provide you better online experiences. The more Google knows, the more helpful it can be. Do you want random ads or do you want ads that address personal interests? (No open consideration of whether you want ads at all). Apple and Microsoft, in contrast, vow to protect your privacy. The use of data derived from your online behavior is described as a privacy issue.
I’m speaking to you from Silicon Valley, where some of the most prominent and successful companies have built their businesses by lulling their customers into complacency about their personal information.
Guess who – Tim Cook
When I attempt to understand the decisions of technology companies, I ask myself “What are the business model?” We know what these companies offer. Microsoft sells software and some might argue services. Apple sells you hardware, some software, and access to content and services developed by other companies. Google sells a few services and access to other companies content and software, but mostly it sells ad impressions.
These companies do offer users some “no cost” incentives. Microsoft gives away some cross-platform services (One Note, Bing search). Apple gives away some software to Apple users (the OS and productivity apps), but is very limited in cross-platform opportunities. Google gives away many cross-platform services.
You are a user? What do you want? Do remember the Stones’ song – You can’t always get what you want (but if you try some time, you can get what you need)? This actually good advice and should be heeded in this situation. An acceptable answer to the question of what do you want should not be – I want stuff for free. A better answer might be – I want reasonably priced goods and services and not to be taken advantage of in order to obtain what I need.
Apple’s present gamble is that it can do locally on a device what Google does with machine learning and the Google cloud. Apple understands the importance of personalization, but intends to develop a different approach. Rather than collect information based on your behavior, store these data in the cloud and then personalize services based on what appear to be your priorities, Apple intends to keep your data on your device to convince you that your data are not being shared or used for other evil purposes. If developed by Apple using this approach, a service comparable to Google Now could offer useful information related to personal needs without sharing the personal priorities the system determined with Apple. I suppose Apple assumes you view ads as a nuisance you could do without and can search when you want information about a product or service. Apple also assumes you can do without free Google services and will find other services as a substitute. I also suppose it is possible Apple may believe it can offer similar free services if providing such services further reduced interest in what Google offers. This last possibility has yet to materialize as Apple has not been able to develop credible cloud services to this point.
What about Microsoft? A similar logic might apply. Microsoft now promotes its combination of free and paid services (and software) by assuming you are willing to pay for some things in compensation for not having to share personal information.
If you are willing to give up your Google services what is it you assume? I suggest you assume Apple will be able to actually create the device based “personal priority and needs” approach it claims to be developing and that Apple will get far better at cloud services.
The “nuclear option” for anti-Google companies is to build in default mechanisms for blocking ads. At present, if Google can show no ads it would not have enough alternative revenue streams to stay afloat. Customers taking advantage of this “privacy” opportunity and not understanding what they get in the trade for their information could possibly ruin Google. Of course, it is more complicated than just Google vs. Apple and Microsoft. Removing ads, also removes an incentive for many who offer content for free. Those offering content would need other incentives for doing so and the consequences of these other incentives are unclear.
Why do I care? While I understand the general motive of companies to acquire as much of the pie as possible, I do not see a system with few players as great for consumers. I think greater awareness of how companies make money is important. How you or I interpret these finance models is important? It is possible to spin whichever approach you choose to attack? Apple’s model involves overpricing locking users into software and services that may not be the best available. Apple supports blocking ads that were intended to appear by the authors of content. Google uses data about user behavior.
I see today that ND EduTech has Office365 for K-12 working. Higher Ed in ND offers the same system. The release was described as offering students 21st Century Learning tools.
Just for the record, I regard Microsoft as lagging behind Google in developing cloud services (and Apple in developing hardware). Both Apple and Microsoft have been pushed toward cloud applications by the success of Google. Having used all of these systems, I would rank them Google, Microsoft, and then Apple.
It is interesting that Microsoft seems have to changed the company approach to pay attention to K-12. Apple used to have this focus with the logic that this emphasis might create future adult users. Apple seemed to back away from this focus as its hardware products became the industry leader is many categories. Microsoft may now be taking a similar approach. Note that the free/low cost to students is a way to get individuals invested in the platform. The “adult” version requires a purchase. Of course, Google apps are ad supported for adults. Will most adults purchase Microsoft products for themselves?
I find Google docs easier to use for peer collaborative writing and peer editing. Any system, Apple, Google, Microsoft has a way to collaborate, but I find the Google approach easier to use. I also see the total “suite” offered by Google better suited to education. To my knowledge, there are no Microsoft or Apple equivalents to Sites, YouTube, Hangouts, Forms or Blogger. I see these products important to developing the multimedia authoring and collaboration skills of students. Contrary to the notion of 21st Century skills, learning, etc., the Microsoft offerings are both dated and limited in scope. I give Microsoft an advantage for OneNote.
I frequently write about Google apps which I feel offer students great opportunities and value. While I believe Google offers the best resources of this type, I also believe that without competition companies fail to improve and take advantage of the commitment of their users.
So, I propose that if you are a committed Microsoft user that you try out Office Online. I was surprised when I tried to investigate this service and found that I already an account. Evidently Office Online is the follow-up to Microsoft web apps and documents created with Online are stored in OneDrive with is the follow-up to SkyDrive.
Online is a free product that offers a software as service equivalent of Word, Excel and PowerPoint. The free version comes with 15 gigabytes of storage. Microsoft offers a service similar to Google Apps for Education – Office 365 Education.
Microsoft recently announced their tablet would be donated to 10,000 educators attending this year’s ISTE conference and the device would now be sold for $200 in the education market. You wonder whether this is a way to get rid of inventory that will not sell, a clever long-term marketing strategy, or both. Anyway, these announcements got me thinking about why it would matter which device I use and which I would recommend. Have we reached the point that price should be the deciding variable?
This question has frequently been framed as whether tech hardware (e.g., laptop, tablet) has become a commodity. My interpretation of this term, given my ag background, is that the value of different products is roughly equivalent (e.g., corn, milk) so the expectation is the cost to purchase should be very similar and because of competition low. A Mac Pro would not fall into this classification. The question, if you are an Apple advocate, is whether the term should be applied to the iPad and say the Air.
I assume the coming days will see comparisons of the iPad, Nexus, and Surface. I do not own a Surface, but I have both iPads and a Nexus. My consumption and production needs can be accomplished with either. I still find the iPad a little easier to use and there are apps I prefer on this device. I admit in nearly all cases there are alternatives or I assume developers will eventually get around to making unique apps cross platform should the number of competing products reach a critical level.
What I happen to value now is that a device get me to the things I want to do in the cloud. Frequently, I need to work with Google apps, but this access could also involve Feedly, Evernote, DropBox, Box, Flickr, Diigo and probably a few others that do not come immediately to mind. Both Apple and Microsoft seem to be attempting to ramp up their cloud presence – the cross-platform opportunity to use iWork apps and Microsoft Office 365 seem promising (as long as the work better than Mobile Me). I bothers me a bit I do not see the revenue stream in all cases, but I leave that to the companies to work out.
For those of us who work to support classroom use of technology, a commodity mentality would discourage such a great focus on the identification of the next new thing and a greater focus on creative and productive ideas for using a core set of tools. Consider the popular conference sessions during which several well-known presenters attempt to wow the audience by demonstrating services and devices few know about. Entertaining, but not that productive. Interesting activities for classroom use would end up being far more helpful.
That all sounds like we are moving into an era of DULL. What could be wrong with commodity devices? The concern I think is the lack of motivation to improve capabilities rather than reduce cost? You might imagine this as the Dell vs. Apple approach. Where will the profit margins necessary for innovation come from?
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
You must be logged in to post a comment.